The Argument Reasoning Comprehension Task: Identification and Reconstruction of Implicit Warrants

Reasoning is a crucial part of natural language argumentation. To comprehend an argument, one must analyze its warrant, which explains why its claim follows from its premises. As arguments are highly contextualized, warrants are usually presupposed and left implicit. Thus, the comprehension does not only require language understanding and logic skills, but also depends on common sense. In this paper we develop a methodology for reconstructing warrants systematically. We operationalize it in a scalable crowdsourcing process, resulting in a freely licensed dataset with warrants for 2k authentic arguments from news comments. On this basis, we present a new challenging task, the argument reasoning comprehension task. Given an argument with a claim and a premise, the goal is to choose the correct implicit warrant from two options. Both warrants are plausible and lexically close, but lead to contradicting claims. A solution to this task will define a substantial step towards automatic warrant reconstruction. However, experiments with several neural attention and language models reveal that current approaches do not suffice.Comment: Accepted as NAACL 2018 Long Paper; see details on the front pag

SNU_IDS at SemEval-2018 Task 12: Sentence Encoder with Contextualized Vectors for Argument Reasoning Comprehension

We present a novel neural architecture for the Argument Reasoning Comprehension task of SemEval 2018. It is a simple neural network consisting of three parts, collectively judging whether the logic built on a set of given sentences (a claim, reason, and warrant) is plausible or not. The model utilizes contextualized word vectors pre-trained on large machine translation (MT) datasets as a form of transfer learning, which can help to mitigate the lack of training data. Quantitative analysis shows that simply leveraging LSTMs trained on MT datasets outperforms several baselines and non-transferred models, achieving accuracies of about 70% on the development set and about 60% on the test set.Comment: SemEval 201

Use or misuse of the selection task? Rejoinder to Fiddick, Cosmides and Tooby

Sperber, Cara, and Girotto (1995) argued that, in Wason's selection task, relevance-guided comprehension processes tend to determine participants' performance and pre-empt the use of other inferential capacities. Because of this, the value of the selection task as a tool for studying human inference has been grossly overestimated. Fiddick, Cosmides, and Tooby (2000) argued against Sperber et al. that specialized inferential mechanisms, in particular the “social contract algorithm” hypothesized by Cosmides (1989), pre-empt more general comprehension abilities, making the selection task a useful tool after all. We rebut this argument. We argue and illustrate with two new experiments, that Fiddick et al. mix the true Wason selection task with a trivially simple categorization task superficially similar to the Wason task, yielding methodologically flawed evidence. We conclude that the extensive use of various kinds of selection tasks in the psychology of reasoning has been quite counter-productive and should be discontinued

Towards an Indexical Model of Situated Language Comprehension for Cognitive Agents in Physical Worlds

We propose a computational model of situated language comprehension based on the Indexical Hypothesis that generates meaning representations by translating amodal linguistic symbols to modal representations of beliefs, knowledge, and experience external to the linguistic system. This Indexical Model incorporates multiple information sources, including perceptions, domain knowledge, and short-term and long-term experiences during comprehension. We show that exploiting diverse information sources can alleviate ambiguities that arise from contextual use of underspecific referring expressions and unexpressed argument alternations of verbs. The model is being used to support linguistic interactions in Rosie, an agent implemented in Soar that learns from instruction.Comment: Advances in Cognitive Systems 3 (2014